The legal justification for long-standing statutory language prohibiting the Congressional Research Service from making its reports available outside the halls of Congress has been effectively superseded by the Internet Age, former House senior counsel Mike Stern said Monday.

For years, some members of Congress have argued that making CRS reports automatically available to the public, say through a searchable website, would remove the reports and their authors from constitutional protections that allow members of Congress and their staffs to keep most of their papers private.

As a result, they argued, CRS analysts would be hit with endless subpoenas seeking the interview notes and policy documents underlying their reports, wasting staff time and damaging their ability to get candid feedback from executive branch employees and others.

In reality, tens of thousands of CRS reports are already in the public domain and the office has not been burdened with endless lawsuits, Stern said.

Stern said he recalled only one time during his eight years as House senior counsel, from 1996 through 2004, when CRS analysts' notes were sought in a lawsuit -- during sweeping litigation between the federal government and tobacco companies. The government did not release the notes, he said.

Stern was speaking at a panel discussion on the CRS' future sponsored by the Sunlight Foundation, an open government group.

Some retired CRS staffers in the audience saw the loss of constitutional protections as a greater possibility than Stern did.

While retired CRS subject matter specialist Mort Rosenberg didn't outright object to legislation allowing CRS reports to be posted online, he said it would be important that the posting be done by Congress itself, not the research service.

Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., has introduced several times a bill to put CRS reports online.

A staffer for Quigley who also spoke at Monday's panel discussion said Quigley plans to reintroduce a broad government transparency bill that includes the CRS provision by the end of the month and will introduce the provision as a standalone bill later this year.

Nonconfidential CRS reports can currently be made public with the authorization of a single member of Congress and congressional staffers routinely pass them along in paper or PDF form to journalists, executive branch staff and members of the public interested in a specific topic.

"I think they haven't quite figured out how to cope with the Internet Age," Aftergood said of the organization referred to as Congress' think tank. "In many respects they're really stuck in the 1990s." Aftergood was a panelist at the Sunlight Foundation discussion.

The CRS' 2009 annual report described a pilot program that would allow some congressional committees to automatically post CRS reports containing certain search terms on their websites, according to the panels' moderator, Daniel Schuman, director of the Sunlight Foundation's Advisory Committee on Transparency.

That plan did not come to fruition and it's not clear if it ever got off the ground, Schuman said.

That report has since been removed from CRS' website he said.

While CRS produces some reports on an annual or other standard schedule, the agency is tasked with responding to research requests from any member of Congress.

Some critics of putting CRS reports online have argued that the more publicly known CRS becomes the more likely interest groups and individuals will be to pressure members of Congress to request CRS reports for their own interests, flooding the agency with work that's not aimed at helping the legislative process.

FROM OUR SPONSORS

sponsored

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or
otherwise objectionable. Although Nextgov does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has
no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to
be in violation of this rule.

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from Nextgov.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.